Forsworn, good or bad?

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:29 am

So what`s everyone take on this people?Lets put it step by step:

-The reach is their land cause they where the first.

-The Nords started conquering left and right and defeated them and took The Reach from them.

-These Bretons who where there first do not accept the Nord ruling(nor should anyone whos been conquered) and decide to take back there land.

Now its all well and good till here, the Nords at this point in time are obviously the bad guys.But after decades of war they turn to Daedric lords and even worse Hagravens.They sacrificed a huge part of there humanity by siding with them, just so they can take back there lands.

Now where does that leave them?I would say still good.If they get there lands back i can see them getting rid of Hagravens and the like.What do you guys think?

User avatar
Emma Parkinson
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:53 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 11:28 am

it is quite obvious they are BAD.
User avatar
Crystal Clarke
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:55 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:43 am

I like the forsworn, they are interesting and I generally don't like the oppressive nord ruling class of Markarth especially those silver-bloods.
User avatar
Sanctum
 
Posts: 3524
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:29 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:22 am

Their cause is just, but the ways by which they pursue is is cause for grave concern. So there may be no simple answer to that question.

One of the few people who understood Hannibal Lecter may have said it best: good and evil qualities can exist side by side in the same person.

User avatar
naana
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:00 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 4:15 am

It falls to only certain economic philosophies to believe that land is a property and specifically a property of the "natives", in itself a ridiculously complex term to define. People who will not accept the natives should not be permitted to settle, likewise natives who will not accept change, especially in the form of different races, should not be permitted stay. Whether on Earth or Nirn, resources are limited, and civilizations, whether primitive or advanced, have no more claim to their planet's surface space than any other. In essence, the Forsworn are as evil as the Nords they despise.

All that said, the current rulers may be oppressive, whereas the Forsworn are downright genocidal. While neither is desirable, freedom is much more likely to arise from the former than the latter. I still prefer corrupt taxation to being slaughtered without cause by practioners of the dark arts while merely attempting to pick flowers.

User avatar
Liv Staff
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:51 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 4:51 am

Hard to say whether they're "good" or "bad"!

It's a pity they weren't more developed as a Race/Faction in game.

User avatar
stephanie eastwood
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:25 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 2:03 pm

If the Forsworn hid in Ancient Reachmen Ruins, and did not worship the bad Daedra, I would feel a small tinge of Guilt for attempted extermination of every last Forsworn within the Game World.

I enjoy helping the Reachmen by clearing Mines of Draugr, Forsworn, and Silverblood Mercenaries. I even let Melka live, even if She should be in a Cage in Windhelm as the very last Hagraven in Skyrim for many of My characters.

User avatar
anna ley
 
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:04 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 5:08 am

Bad.. Bad bad bad.. They worship Daedra (and work freely with hagravens). Briarharts have their living hearts removed to be replaced by an herb.. heart.. thing. I may play an assasin (or occasionally werewolf or vampire) and even they kill Forsworn on sight. They are fanatical barbarians living in the past, just like the Blades. Kill them and be done with it. :P

User avatar
T. tacks Rims
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:35 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 4:05 am

That mess about " the land don't belong to anyone " is a load of skeever dung. The lands of every area through time has been defended by cultures that reside in them. It's territorial claim. These are the lands my people reside, thrive to live upon, cherish and will defend to the death to protect against the aggression of others that embark to invade.

The Forsworn are the Reachmen. Their Breton ancestors of High Rock settled the mountains of the West Reach, along with the Orcs. Of which, they were influenced by the Orc culture. As well as Nordic culture and accept both Nords and Orcs into their ranks.

Being somewhat of a melting pot, they adapted the support from anywhere they could to ensure the sovereignty of the West Reach. That just happened to include the powerful witches of the area, as it was their homeland as well. So, it was in everyone's best interest to come together and fight.

User avatar
chloe hampson
 
Posts: 3493
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:15 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:14 pm

This.

I'd say non-Forsworn Reachmen are the most affected in spite of being content with the Nords ruling them. What I disliked is the Silverbloods' hypocrisy in supporting the Stormcloaks when they represent exactly what the Stormcloaks are against. Just replace Nords with Reachmen and Imperials with Nords and it's pretty similar. Even though I disapprove of the Forsworn's actions I loved releasing Madanach and killing off the Silverbloods (Thongvor included).

Both sides of the Forsworn/Nord conflict are awful, though, there's no denying that.

User avatar
Brooke Turner
 
Posts: 3319
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:13 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 10:45 am

Forsworn aren't really that bad (though you saw what happened when they actually DID take control of the Reach), they remind me of Native Americans. It was their land (so they say at least) and the Nords kicked them off of it. It happens, and it's not always for the most noble of reasons either. Regardless, if the Forsworn attack me, or any other citizen of the Reach (mainly Nord citizens) then I won't hesitate to kill them and take their soul.

User avatar
Arrogant SId
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:39 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 9:41 am

quick question, but at the risk of sounding extremely stupid, when the nords first came from atmora and settled, was the land already theirs (the bretons), or was it the snow elves?

Who first held claim to the 'reach'?

User avatar
Captian Caveman
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 5:36 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 4:10 pm

The way I understand it, the Aldemri were there first. Then the region was lost to the first Empire and the Aldemri reclaimed the area. One would need to research that a little more. I'm running from sheer memory and may be a little off.

User avatar
dell
 
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 2:58 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:06 am

This.

User avatar
Carlos Rojas
 
Posts: 3391
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:19 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 8:04 am

Bad.

They act as though they represent the people of the reach but the real Reachmen are just a branch of Breton whilst the Forsworn are a separatist group who have unholy practices and believes.
User avatar
Charlie Sarson
 
Posts: 3445
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 12:38 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:25 pm

Most reachmen disagree with the forsworn.

They're the remains of the old witchmen of the area that refused to integrate when society "civilized", they perform blood sacrifices, aligned with Molag Bal, and attack foreigners regardless of their affiliations.

High Rock doesn't want them, and neither does Skyrim, and I don't blame either one.

User avatar
kyle pinchen
 
Posts: 3475
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:01 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 3:29 am

where does the falmer factor into this?

User avatar
Luna Lovegood
 
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:45 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 5:57 pm

I'm afraid you will have to go to the Lore Forum for a more detailed insight, and/or read through the Imperial Library.

User avatar
Kate Murrell
 
Posts: 3537
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:02 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 2:31 am

aah okay, no worries

User avatar
Your Mum
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:23 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 7:57 am

Good, bad, I'm the one with the Thu'm,

Kidding aside, no matter the claim the Forsworn are Hagraven dupes.

The Forsworn/Nords/Silverblood conflict is one of those all too common things where no one is in the right, no one is good, all are bad.

Understanding is a three-edged sword after all.

User avatar
Nitol Ahmed
 
Posts: 3321
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:35 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 6:39 pm

Falmer and Dwemer were there first. Nords showed up, kicked the falmer out, conquered all of High Rock some of Hammerfell, Cyrodiil, and Morrowind. Eventually they lost those holdings in 1e420. Some time around 1e1030 when Hestra of the first empire showed up to conquer the reach again, the forsworn formed out of some of the people living in the reach at the time. And they've been in conflict with the people in control of the land ever since.

User avatar
KiiSsez jdgaf Benzler
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 7:10 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 4:02 pm

so, seeing as the falmer and dwemer aren't really around anymore, could you say the reach is the nords'? or when the nords conquered high rock ect, did they just kick out the bretons living there?

edit: what im trying to say is, did the bretons come to the reach after the nordic empire fell apart?

User avatar
Ernesto Salinas
 
Posts: 3399
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 2:19 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 8:36 am

EDIT:Mispost (I really need to get a better phone) ingore
User avatar
Bek Rideout
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:00 pm

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 5:16 am

There are Nords in the forsworn? Could you point one out please because I'v never met one
User avatar
Trent Theriot
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:37 am

Post » Thu May 23, 2013 3:52 pm

Technically the forsworn heritage is nearly every race.

http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Pocket_Guide_to_the_Empire,_1st_Edition/High_Rock

User avatar
Prisca Lacour
 
Posts: 3375
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:25 am

Next

Return to V - Skyrim